The second licence in SA

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

If the Norwood-Sturt bid or the 'consortium' bid had got up for the second South Australian licence, would you have switched allegiances to the new team?

I am a Sturt fan and I'll admit that I would have hopped on board the Sturtwood bandwagon. I'm a Crows fan since 1991 and consider myself a loyal supporter but being a Sturt fan pre-dates that for me. Sturt were the first team I barracked for. It's like blood being thicker than water - Sturt are like my family, the Crows are the "woman" I married.

I don't know what that says about me and my level of Crows love. What it does say is that Port fans have got a pretty sweet deal, being able to follow their own club into the AFL. Did the rest of us just latch on to the next best thing?

What about other SANFL fans?

 

[brucetiki]

Personally, if the consortium including Centrals had won the bid, I probably would have switched to the new side for the same reasons you've mentioned Carl.

Port beating Centrals in the 1995 and 1996 SANFL Grand Finals only galvanised my support for the Crows, ensured that I hated Port with a passion from their first game in the AFL, and ensured I will never ever support the Power.

 

[KUNG FU]

Would have been all over Sturtwood. Its a real shame the AFL and SANFL couldn't come together and put together two genuine amalgam sides rather than the two Port centric identities that have emerged, Port and not-Port.

 

[Schulzycrow]

Good topic Carl, would have been torn being a Norwood follower after my dad's brainwashing from a young age.

I know it would have made barracking for the second SA side a lot easier to do when it didn't involve the crows.

 

[feenix67]

Sturtwood ftw

 

[-CG-]

I'm too young to remember such an event but was it actually going to be called Sturtwood?

 

[NTRabbit]

I'm too young to remember such an event but was it actually going to be called Sturtwood?

More likely to have been the missing direction on the compass, East Adelaide, given the location of Norwood, Unley and the Division of Sturt. Not sure it even got as far as a name, but then I never did pay much attention to the whole saga at the time.

 

[RoosterLad]

No chance as I don't support those two teams but if a North bid had won I would have definitely switched to them as, like Carl, my support for North started before the Crows were formed.

 

[Cap]

I think in hindsight Centrals should have been the location.

but hindsight is a wonderful thing and it isn't going to help us out with the debacle we have down the road.

 

[Vader]

My personal opinion is that they should have setup the 2nd license with a geographical divide - my choice being the River Torrens. Clubs based to the north of the Torrens (North, Centrals, Port, WWT) would be aligned with the 2nd club, clubs to the south & east of the Torrens (South, Glenelg, Norwood, Sturt) would be aligned with the Crows. West could choose whichever side they wanted to play for.

Most cities in Australia seem to have a natural geographic divide. In Perth you live "south of the river" or "north of the river", in Sydney it's north or south of the harbour, in Darwin it's north or south of the airport. The Torrens might not be a massive divide like the others, which usually only have a limited number of crossing points, but it is convenient and does divide the city reasonably equally.

As for the OP... I certainly would have been torn. Glad I never had to make that choice. I'm a Norwood boy from way back, but after 6 years supporting the Crows I'm not sure whether I could have turned my back on them and supported another team - even if that team was a partnership including my beloved Redlegs.

 

[jo172]

Sturt supporter, and Sturtwood can go and get ****ed.

 

[Malibu#27]

My personal opinion is that they should have setup the 2nd license with a geographical divide - my choice being the River Torrens. Clubs based to the north of the Torrens (North, Centrals, Port, WWT) would be aligned with the 2nd club, clubs to the south & east of the Torrens (South, Glenelg, Norwood, Sturt) would be aligned with the Crows. West could choose whichever side they wanted to play for.

Most cities in Australia seem to have a natural geographic divide. In Perth you live "south of the river" or "north of the river", in Sydney it's north or south of the harbour, in Darwin it's north or south of the airport. The Torrens might not be a massive divide like the others, which usually only have a limited number of crossing points, but it is convenient and does divide the city reasonably equally.

As for the OP... I certainly would have been torn. Glad I never had to make that choice. I'm a Norwood boy from way back, but after 6 years supporting the Crows I'm not sure whether I could have turned my back on them and supported another team - even if that team was a partnership including my beloved Redlegs.

What if it was Norwood going alone ?

 

[birdmanptr]

What I've always wondered is what if Port did get in first.What would be the state of the 2 clubs now on and off field

If Port had 6 years before the Crows how many would have jumped of Port in 96 or would they have stayed if they were non Port people who joined Port in 91 for the sake of following a AFL side

 

[Malibu#27]

What I've always wondered is what if Port did get in first.What would be the state of the 2 clubs now on and off field

If Port had 6 years before the Crows how many would have jumped of Port in 96 or would they have stayed if they were non Port people who joined Port in 91 for the sake of following a AFL side

I think Port would have picked up many of the neutral "new" supporters, and would have had a better shot at picking up supporters from other clubs - although this would have been somewhat tempered by the animosity towards them at the time.

When the Crows came in they would have pulled many back, but just like magpies fans that supported the Crows went in, a good splattering would have remained with Port.

Nett result would have been a more even spread of support between the two sides, although Crows would still be in front.

Of course on field success/failure would have had an impact as well. Ie - the Crows relatively lean years in 94/95/96 would have made it easier for the odd fan to jump off them and on to Port in 97.

 

[birdmanptr]

I think Port would have picked up many of the neutral "new" supporters, and would have had a better shot at picking up supporters from other clubs - although this would have been somewhat tempered by the animosity towards them at the time.

When the Crows came in they would have pulled many back, but just like magpies fans that supported the Crows went in, a good splattering would have remained with Port.

Nett result would have been a more even spread of support between the two sides, although Crows would still be in front.

Of course on field success/failure would have had an impact as well. Ie - the Crows relatively lean years in 94/95/96 would have made it easier for the odd fan to jump off them and on to Port in 97.

Totally agree with all that I know I would have gone just to see top level footy.

Who knows I might have got hooked and stayed a Po Po Po errr maybe not

But the what ifs are endless Memberships,Premierships,

 

[cmndstab]

I really only started supporting the Crows because my whole family did and that was all I knew growing up My dad was a North supporter and my mum a Norwood supporter so I guess if one of them had jumped onto a new bandwagon I would have had to make a choice.

 

[Vader]

What if it was Norwood going alone ?

That was never on the cards.

I probably would have jumped ship, but I would have still had a warm place for Adelaide in my heart. They definitely would have been my 2nd team... As distinct from the current situation where I support 2 teams - the Adelaide Crows and whoever is playing Port.

 

[ltdamn]

A lot of supporters would have made the jump to the 2nd team. Don't forget that the Crow's waiting list for memberships at that stage was in excess of 5 years. Many, many more people would have gotten on board with the second side.

We would have seen a situation where there was a far more even distribution of support across the two teams, and larger crowds for the second side, which would ultimately have brought more money to the SANFL and the clubs.

 

[smoovy]

My personal opinion is that they should have setup the 2nd license with a geographical divide - my choice being the River Torrens. Clubs based to the north of the Torrens (North, Centrals, Port, WWT) would be aligned with the 2nd club, clubs to the south & east of the Torrens (South, Glenelg, Norwood, Sturt) would be aligned with the Crows. West could choose whichever side they wanted to play for.

Most cities in Australia seem to have a natural geographic divide. In Perth you live "south of the river" or "north of the river", in Sydney it's north or south of the harbour, in Darwin it's north or south of the airport. The Torrens might not be a massive divide like the others, which usually only have a limited number of crossing points, but it is convenient and does divide the city reasonably equally.

As for the OP... I certainly would have been torn. Glad I never had to make that choice. I'm a Norwood boy from way back, but after 6 years supporting the Crows I'm not sure whether I could have turned my back on them and supported another team - even if that team was a partnership including my beloved Redlegs.

A geographical divide would have driven more competition between the supporters of each club, but unfortunately the dynamics of the support just don't work that way since Port has been so successful in the SANFL.

Now geopgraphically speaking, we could end up with the absolutely ludicrous situation where Port Adelaide could play their home games in Adelaide (Adelaide Oval) and Adelaide could play their home games effectively at Port Adelaide (AAMI-West Lakes).

 

[screech]

Being a Sturt supporter, I was cheering on the bid for the "Bluelegs" to be the second AFL licence. I remember reading the paper everyday for months leading up to the announcement and then being devastated watching the media conference on TV when Port was announced. Yes I would have jumped on the Bluelegs but it would have been awkward. All history now I guess.

 

[andrew23]

Pretty facinating stuff. Are there any pictures of possible Sturt/Norwood colours, mascots, jumpers, logo's etc ?

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

I think Port would have picked up many of the neutral "new" supporters, and would have had a better shot at picking up supporters from other clubs - although this would have been somewhat tempered by the animosity towards them at the time.

This is right I reckon.

I reckon interest initially in the Crows was from diehard SANFL footy fans but it was 1993 when we swept into the finals and Tony Modra became the biggest star in town that a whole new wave of supporters hopped on board the game.

Interest in the Crows was high and people felt out of the loop if they weren't following the Crows' fortunes.

This was a 'one-time only' deal to pick up passive sports supporters who, up until that time, hadn't had any real interest in AFL/SANFL footy. Port never had an opportunity to scoop up these newcomers. If any non-football fan was going to embrace AFL it would have been when the Crows came in. If they didn't take the bait then there was no way they were going to for Port.

 

[brucetiki]

Pretty facinating stuff. Are there any pictures of possible Sturt/Norwood colours, mascots, jumpers, logo's etc ?

http://www.udogs.info/cms/images/udogs/bm/19940903_bm_01_08.pdf

Page 4 of the PDF and you'll see one proposed Norwood/Sturt design

 

[Macca19]

The question shouldnt be who would have jumped on Sturtwood, but who would have jumped back to the Crows after they won a flag in 97, and then who would have jumped back after they backed it up in 98. I think its something that those that say "support would be more even across the teams" often completely overlook. If you are relying on a stack of Crows supporters to jump off the Crows and support Sturtwood or Cartelaide, then whats stopping them from flip-flopping back after the success Adelaide had in the 2nd teams first two years in the competition?

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

The question shouldnt be who would have jumped on Sturtwood, but who would have jumped back to the Crows after they won a flag in 97, and then who would have jumped back after they backed it up in 98. I think its something that those that say "support would be more even across the teams" often completely overlook. If you are relying on a stack of Crows supporters to jump off the Crows and support Sturtwood or Cartelaide, then whats stopping them from flip-flopping back after the success Adelaide had in the 2nd teams first two years in the competition?

I don't think anyone would jump across. The only reason you'd support the Sturt/Nwd team for instance is if you felt a deeper connection with them than you did Adelaide.

You certainly wouldn't jump off just because another team was winning flags. Winning flags didn't help North Melbourne gain fans. Or Port for that matter.